Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1
Oct 7, 2012 3:00am EDT
here of aiding and abetting a foreign government. it was unclear whether the paraguayan was acting within or without the state's authority, but he was later deported, so we do not know t answer. here the offense is magnified because the allegation is that in english and a dutch company aided and abetted the nigerian government. that is where the offense to the principle against international friction -- international friction is at its highest. if you want to adopt our position in full, at a minimum we think he should hold that the prisons and applies to foreign keep cases involving aiding and abetting a foreign government. but we do not think he should do that. we respectfully submit the better approach is to apply the presumption as a categorial matter. >> why was there not an aiding and abetting? i think it was pretty clear. he was probably working for the government, which is even worse. i am interested in the justice ginsburg pose a question. just assume we think the second circuit was right, is there any way in which we can use the principle of extraterritoriality to roll in
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1